If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ by clicking the
link above. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Announcement

Collapse

The Rules of Pacers Digest

Hello everyone,

Whether your are a long standing forum member or whether you have just registered today, it's a good idea to read and review the rules below so that you have a very good idea of what to expect when you come to Pacers Digest.

A quick note to new members: Your posts will not immediately show up when you make them. An administrator has to approve at least your first post before the forum software will later upgrade your account to the status of a fully-registered member. This usually happens within a couple of hours or so after your post(s) is/are approved, so you may need to be a little patient at first.

Why do we do this? So that it's more difficult for spammers (be they human or robot) to post, and so users who are banned cannot immediately re-register and start dousing people with verbal flames.

Below are the rules of Pacers Digest. After you have read them, you will have a very good sense of where we are coming from, what we expect, what we don't want to see, and how we react to things.

Rule #1

Pacers Digest is intended to be a place to discuss basketball without having to deal with the kinds of behaviors or attitudes that distract people from sticking with the discussion of the topics at hand. These unwanted distractions can come in many forms, and admittedly it can sometimes be tricky to pin down each and every kind that can rear its ugly head, but we feel that the following examples and explanations cover at least a good portion of that ground and should at least give people a pretty good idea of the kinds of things we actively discourage:

"Anyone who __________ is a liar / a fool / an idiot / a blind homer / has their head buried in the sand / a blind hater / doesn't know basketball / doesn't watch the games"

"People with intelligence will agree with me when I say that __________"

"Only stupid people think / believe / do ___________"

"I can't wait to hear something from PosterX when he/she sees that **insert a given incident or current event that will have probably upset or disappointed PosterX here**"

"He/she is just delusional"

"This thread is stupid / worthless / embarrassing"

"I'm going to take a moment to point and / laugh at PosterX / GroupOfPeopleY who thought / believed *insert though/belief here*"

"Remember when PosterX said OldCommentY that no longer looks good? "

In general, if a comment goes from purely on topic to something 'ad hominem' (personal jabs, personal shots, attacks, flames, however you want to call it, towards a person, or a group of people, or a given city/state/country of people), those are most likely going to be found intolerable.

We also dissuade passive aggressive behavior. This can be various things, but common examples include statements that are basically meant to imply someone is either stupid or otherwise incapable of holding a rational conversation. This can include (but is not limited to) laughing at someone's conclusions rather than offering an honest rebuttal, asking people what game they were watching, or another common problem is Poster X will say "that player isn't that bad" and then Poster Y will say something akin to "LOL you think that player is good". We're not going to tolerate those kinds of comments out of respect for the community at large and for the sake of trying to just have an honest conversation.

Now, does the above cover absolutely every single kind of distraction that is unwanted? Probably not, but you should by now have a good idea of the general types of things we will be discouraging. The above examples are meant to give you a good feel for / idea of what we're looking for. If something new or different than the above happens to come along and results in the same problem (that being, any other attitude or behavior that ultimately distracts from actually just discussing the topic at hand, or that is otherwise disrespectful to other posters), we can and we will take action to curb this as well, so please don't take this to mean that if you managed to technically avoid saying something exactly like one of the above examples that you are then somehow off the hook.

That all having been said, our goal is to do so in a generally kind and respectful way, and that doesn't mean the moment we see something we don't like that somebody is going to be suspended or banned, either. It just means that at the very least we will probably say something about it, quite possibly snipping out the distracting parts of the post in question while leaving alone the parts that are actually just discussing the topics, and in the event of a repeating or excessive problem, then we will start issuing infractions to try to further discourage further repeat problems, and if it just never seems to improve, then finally suspensions or bans will come into play. We would prefer it never went that far, and most of the time for most of our posters, it won't ever have to.

A slip up every once and a while is pretty normal, but, again, when it becomes repetitive or excessive, something will be done. Something occasional is probably going to be let go (within reason), but when it starts to become habitual or otherwise a pattern, odds are very good that we will step in.

There's always a small minority that like to push people's buttons and/or test their own boundaries with regards to the administrators, and in the case of someone acting like that, please be aware that this is not a court of law, but a private website run by people who are simply trying to do the right thing as they see it. If we feel that you are a special case that needs to be dealt with in an exceptional way because your behavior isn't explicitly mirroring one of our above examples of what we generally discourage, we can and we will take atypical action to prevent this from continuing if you are not cooperative with us.

Also please be aware that you will not be given a pass simply by claiming that you were 'only joking,' because quite honestly, when someone really is just joking, for one thing most people tend to pick up on the joke, including the person or group that is the target of the joke, and for another thing, in the event where an honest joke gets taken seriously and it upsets or angers someone, the person who is truly 'only joking' will quite commonly go out of his / her way to apologize and will try to mend fences. People who are dishonest about their statements being 'jokes' do not do so, and in turn that becomes a clear sign of what is really going on. It's nothing new.

In any case, quite frankly, the overall quality and health of the entire forum's community is more important than any one troublesome user will ever be, regardless of exactly how a problem is exhibiting itself, and if it comes down to us having to make a choice between you versus the greater health and happiness of the entire community, the community of this forum will win every time.

Lastly, there are also some posters, who are generally great contributors and do not otherwise cause any problems, who sometimes feel it's their place to provoke or to otherwise 'mess with' that small minority of people described in the last paragraph, and while we possibly might understand why you might feel you WANT to do something like that, the truth is we can't actually tolerate that kind of behavior from you any more than we can tolerate the behavior from them. So if we feel that you are trying to provoke those other posters into doing or saying something that will get themselves into trouble, then we will start to view you as a problem as well, because of the same reason as before: The overall health of the forum comes first, and trying to stir the pot with someone like that doesn't help, it just makes it worse. Some will simply disagree with this philosophy, but if so, then so be it because ultimately we have to do what we think is best so long as it's up to us.

If you see a problem that we haven't addressed, the best and most appropriate course for a forum member to take here is to look over to the left of the post in question. See underneath that poster's name, avatar, and other info, down where there's a little triangle with an exclamation point (!) in it? Click that. That allows you to report the post to the admins so we can definitely notice it and give it a look to see what we feel we should do about it. Beyond that, obviously it's human nature sometimes to want to speak up to the poster in question who has bothered you, but we would ask that you try to refrain from doing so because quite often what happens is two or more posters all start going back and forth about the original offending post, and suddenly the entire thread is off topic or otherwise derailed. So while the urge to police it yourself is understandable, it's best to just report it to us and let us handle it. Thank you!

All of the above is going to be subject to a case by case basis, but generally and broadly speaking, this should give everyone a pretty good idea of how things will typically / most often be handled.

Rule #2

If the actions of an administrator inspire you to make a comment, criticism, or express a concern about it, there is a wrong place and a couple of right places to do so.

The wrong place is to do so in the original thread in which the administrator took action. For example, if a post gets an infraction, or a post gets deleted, or a comment within a larger post gets clipped out, in a thread discussing Paul George, the wrong thing to do is to distract from the discussion of Paul George by adding your off topic thoughts on what the administrator did.

The right places to do so are:

A) Start a thread about the specific incident you want to talk about on the Feedback board. This way you are able to express yourself in an area that doesn't throw another thread off topic, and this way others can add their two cents as well if they wish, and additionally if there's something that needs to be said by the administrators, that is where they will respond to it.

B) Send a private message to the administrators, and they can respond to you that way.

If this is done the wrong way, those comments will be deleted, and if it's a repeating problem then it may also receive an infraction as well.

Rule #3

If a poster is bothering you, and an administrator has not or will not deal with that poster to the extent that you would prefer, you have a powerful tool at your disposal, one that has recently been upgraded and is now better than ever: The ability to ignore a user.

When you ignore a user, you will unfortunately still see some hints of their existence (nothing we can do about that), however, it does the following key things:

A) Any post they make will be completely invisible as you scroll through a thread.

B) The new addition to this feature: If someone QUOTES a user you are ignoring, you do not have to read who it was, or what that poster said, unless you go out of your way to click on a link to find out who it is and what they said.

To utilize this feature, from any page on Pacers Digest, scroll to the top of the page, look to the top right where it says 'Settings' and click that. From the settings page, look to the left side of the page where it says 'My Settings', and look down from there until you see 'Edit Ignore List' and click that. From here, it will say 'Add a Member to Your List...' Beneath that, click in the text box to the right of 'User Name', type in or copy & paste the username of the poster you are ignoring, and once their name is in the box, look over to the far right and click the 'Okay' button. All done!

Rule #4

Regarding infractions, currently they carry a value of one point each, and that point will expire in 31 days. If at any point a poster is carrying three points at the same time, that poster will be suspended until the oldest of the three points expires.

Rule #5

When you share or paste content or articles from another website, you must include the URL/link back to where you found it, who wrote it, and what website it's from. Said content will be removed if this doesn't happen.

An example:

If I copy and paste an article from the Indianapolis Star website, I would post something like this:

We cannot tolerate illegal videos on Pacers Digest. This means do not share any links to them, do not mention any websites that host them or link to them, do not describe how to find them in any way, and do not ask about them. Posts doing anything of the sort will be removed, the offenders will be contacted privately, and if the problem becomes habitual, you will be suspended, and if it still persists, you will probably be banned.

The legal means of watching or listening to NBA games are NBA League Pass Broadband (for US, or for International; both cost money) and NBA Audio League Pass (which is free). Look for them on NBA.com.

Rule #7

Provocative statements in a signature, or as an avatar, or as the 'tagline' beneath a poster's username (where it says 'Member' or 'Administrator' by default, if it is not altered) are an unwanted distraction that will more than likely be removed on sight. There can be shades of gray to this, but in general this could be something political or religious that is likely going to provoke or upset people, or otherwise something that is mean-spirited at the expense of a poster, a group of people, or a population.

It may or may not go without saying, but this goes for threads and posts as well, particularly when it's not made on the off-topic board (Market Square).

We do make exceptions if we feel the content is both innocuous and unlikely to cause social problems on the forum (such as wishing someone a Merry Christmas or a Happy Easter), and we also also make exceptions if such topics come up with regards to a sports figure (such as the Lance Stephenson situation bringing up discussions of domestic abuse and the law, or when Jason Collins came out as gay and how that lead to some discussion about gay rights).

However, once the discussion seems to be more/mostly about the political issues instead of the sports figure or his specific situation, the thread is usually closed.

Rule #8

We prefer self-restraint and/or modesty when making jokes or off topic comments in a sports discussion thread. They can be fun, but sometimes they derail or distract from a topic, and we don't want to see that happen. If we feel it is a problem, we will either delete or move those posts from the thread.

Rule #9

Generally speaking, we try to be a "PG-13" rated board, and we don't want to see sexual content or similarly suggestive content. Vulgarity is a more muddled issue, though again we prefer things to lean more towards "PG-13" than "R". If we feel things have gone too far, we will step in.

Rule #10

We like small signatures, not big signatures. The bigger the signature, the more likely it is an annoying or distracting signature.

Rule #11

Do not advertise anything without talking about it with the administrators first. This includes advertising with your signature, with your avatar, through private messaging, and/or by making a thread or post.

Comment

Remind me how had knee surgery? you know the answer but you are just asking this question to start some stupid argument.

Yeah you're right it's 1985 and knee surgery is an automatic career changer still. It's not about a stupid argument it's about your double standard for Pacer players and non Pacer players.

Also, Varejao did suffer a major injury that same year West did, he tore a tendon in his ankle and missed the last 51 games of the season, but you know don't let that stop you.

Someone says Varejao is a littler older, and you say oh he's only 30, but when we signed West you couldn't believe we would spend money on a 31 year old. So yes, it's a double standard, and the injury excuse doesn't even fly because Varejao and West both suffered major injuries that same year, but it is interesting that you only chose to remember West's.

Oh yeah, and Varejao broke his right wrist last year too....but yeah I'm just trying to start a stupid argument, if you don't want to get called out, maybe you should start having more consistent opinions. You didn't want anything to do with West because he was 31 and had knee surgery, but you're all about going out and getting a 30 year old who in the past two years has torn a tendon ankle and broke his wrist, doesn't that seem a little contradictory? I'm not saying Varejao is injury prone, but the way he plays definitely makes him susceptible to injuries. I have begun to notice an interesting pattern about some of the players you always want us to obtain though.

Comment

That's what I am saying. I don't think the Pacers have the assets to get him. Cleveland just says no.

Pacers and Cleveland are not really great trade partners, because while Varejao would be a nice asset for us to have, our front court is not a pressing need at the moment. Even with Roy's poor play offensively he has still been very good defensively and West's increase in production offensively has sort of countered Roy's dropoff. Right now we are lacking a really good wing scorer, and maybe Danny is that guy when he comes back or maybe not, but until Danny returns it is clearly our biggest need. The Pacers of course should also be trying to get in on any deal that can land them a big time PG, nothing against Hill he is a fantastic player, but I would love if he could become our jack of all trades, who would sometimes start at the 1 or 2, but would also come off the bench. We should not and hopefully Hill doesn't either view him as a starter just because of his contract, he absolutely needs to play 32-35 minutes a night but how he gets those minutes could vary. He could thrive IMO as a super sub who starts in certain situations with Paul swapping to the bench on those nights, once the team is fully healthy. Lots of ways to improve this team at the deadline IMO, but I don't think dealing with Cleveland for Varejao is a very logical one from our side or theirs.

Comment

Yeah you're right it's 1985 and knee surgery is an automatic career changer still.It's not about a stupid argument it's about your double standard for Pacer players and non Pacer players.

Also, Varejao did suffer a major injury that same year West did, he tore a tendon in his ankle and missed the last 51 games of the season, but you know don't let that stop you.

Someone says Varejao is a littler older, and you say oh he's only 30, but when we signed West you couldn't believe we would spend money on a 31 year old. So yes, it's a double standard, and the injury excuse doesn't even fly because Varejao and West both suffered major injuries that same year, but it is interesting that you only chose to remember West's.

Oh yeah, and Varejao broke his right wrist last year too....

Big difference, West had a surgery and nobody knew how healthy he was, THE PACERS TOOK A HUGE RISK, now Varejao has shown so far that he is healthy and that he is the best center in the east HUGE DIFFERENCE and yes he is so far an all star(remember who was laughing at this?)

I also didn't want West next to Roy because both of them are really slow on D, that was my thinking at the time and so far they have proven me right, Varejao is also a legit quick seven footer that can play lock down D and rebound out of his mind, he is the perfect player to have next to Roy.

So at the end if you compare both Varejao and West next to each other the only thing West does better than Varejao is score nothing else, Andy is a way better defender and a way better rebounder and is not even close.

@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

Comment

Pacers and Cleveland are not really great trade partners, because while Varejao would be a nice asset for us to have, our front court is not a pressing need at the moment. Even with Roy's poor play offensively he has still been very good defensively and West's increase in production offensively has sort of countered Roy's dropoff. Right now we are lacking a really good wing scorer, and maybe Danny is that guy when he comes back or maybe not, but until Danny returns it is clearly our biggest need. The Pacers of course should also be trying to get in on any deal that can land them a big time PG, nothing against Hill he is a fantastic player, but I would love if he could become our jack of all trades, who would sometimes start at the 1 or 2, but would also come off the bench. We should not and hopefully Hill doesn't either view him as a starter just because of his contract, he absolutely needs to play 32-35 minutes a night but how he gets those minutes could vary. He could thrive IMO as a super sub who starts in certain situations with Paul swapping to the bench on those nights, once the team is fully healthy. Lots of ways to improve this team at the deadline IMO, but I don't think dealing with Cleveland for Varejao is a very logical one from our side or theirs.

Uh?....... right now Hill is playing close to an all star level why would you want to bring somebody else?

@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

Comment

Big difference, West had a surgery and nobody knew how healthy he was, THE PACERS TOOK A HUGE RISK, now Varejao has shown so far that he is healthy and that he is the best center in the east HUGE DIFFERENCE and yes he is so far an all star(remember who was laughing at this?)

I also didn't want West next to Roy because both of them are really slow on D, that was my thinking at the time and so far they have proven me right, Varejao is also a legit quick seven footer that can play lock down D and rebound out of his mind, he is the perfect player to have next to Roy.

So at the end if you compare both Varejao and West next to each other the only thing West does better than Varejao is score nothing else, Andy is a way better defender and a way better rebounder and is not even close.

Varejao playing a combined 56 games the last two seasons shows he can stay healthy? Got it. That makes sense.

This isn't about who is better, this is about you not having any concern with Varejao's age and his injury history while with West you did. Varejao is a great rebounder, but the guy has hurt himself multiple times becuase of how he plays, separated shoulder, torn tendon in ankle, broken wrist...I'm not saying it would preclude me from being interested in him, but it is hilarious to me that with West you were seriously concerned with his age and his injury, but with Varejao you act like it is no big deal at all.

Varejao and Roy doesn't really make sense next to each other. West and Varejao to me does make sense, but the cart is hitched to the Roy horse.

Comment

Uh?....... right now Hill is playing close to an all star level why would you want to bring somebody else?

So that it can continue to free Hill up to bring what we need on the back court on any given night. It's not about HIll being bad, but it's about trying to use his talents to their maximum benefit for the team.

Comment

Varejao playing a combined 56 games the last two seasons shows he can stay healthy? Got it. That makes sense.

This isn't about who is better, this is about you not having any concern with Varejao's age and his injury history while with West you did. Varejao is a great rebounder, but the guy has hurt himself multiple times becuase of how he plays, separated shoulder, torn tendon in ankle, broken wrist...I'm not saying it would preclude me from being interested in him, but it is hilarious to me that with West you were seriously concerned with his age and his injury, but with Varejao you act like it is no big deal at all.

Varejao and Roy doesn't really make sense next to each other. West and Varejao to me does make sense, but the cart is hitched to the Roy horse.

Don't forget that West has shown his knee isn't a problem, and Vnzla continues to harp about his age. So if the excuse is that it's just not age, but age and unknown health together, then the criticism should stop when the unknown health question has been answered.

Comment

Varejao playing a combined 56 games the last two seasons shows he can stay healthy? Got it. That makes sense.

Varejao could have played more games in the past seasons but Cleveland had not reasons to play him because they were(are) in tanking mode, he doesn't have some long term injury concern either so I'm not worry about that.

This isn't about who is better, this is about you not having any concern with Varejao's age and his injury history while with West you did. Varejao is a great rebounder, but the guy has hurt himself multiple times becuase of how he plays, separated shoulder, torn tendon in ankle, broken wrist...I'm not saying it would preclude me from being interested in him, but it is hilarious to me that with West you were seriously concerned with his age and his injury, but with Varejao you act like it is no big deal at all.

Again you are just arguing for the sake of arguing, West was a 31 years old player that had a serious knee injury, nobody knew how healthy he was going to be, there is a reason why not many teams tried to get him(only Boston and Indiana) and there is a reason why the Pacers only gave him a two years contract BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T KNOW HOW HEALTHY HE WAS, and nope I'm not ignoring Varejao's injury concerns but for what I've seen he got hurt while playing the game he doesn't have any long term injuries or anything like that and so far he has proven that he is healthy, the same with West.

Varejao and Roy doesn't really make sense next to each other. West and Varejao to me does make sense, but the cart is hitched to the Roy horse.

West and Varejao makes sense if Cleveland was willing to take on Roy's contract but I don't think they are crazy to do that and the Pacers won't do it either.

@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

Comment

Dwight Howard says he's happy with the Lakers. Very. But he won't commit to staying with them past this season. "We're not going to talk about it," he said Saturday. "We're not getting into that." He's sticking with the recent trend established by LeBron James, Chris Bosh and, this season, Chris Paul. Howard is another All-Star in the last year of his contract, waiting to see what happens with his team before making a commitment of another five years.

@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!

Comment

Dwight Coward, what an fool. I wouldn't want that baby as the leader of my team.

He's slowly on the decline anyway as are the Lakers.

I have Anderson Varejao as the current best center in the NBA.

That being the case is a huge argument for Roy's contract being reasonable. How sad is it that Varejao and Lopez are going to be the All Star Centers for the East? Nice guys, decent players, playing well, but not the best two guys in half the league.

Comment

That being the case is a huge argument for Roy's contract being reasonable. How sad is it that Varejao and Lopez are going to be the All Star Centers for the East? Nice guys, decent players, playing well, but not the best two guys in half the league.

Varejao is averaging 15 and 15 while Lopez is averaging 18 and 7, just to remind you Roy made it as an all star last year while averaging 12 and 8, now you tell me what's more sad? .....

@WhatTheFFacts: Studies show that sarcasm enhances the ability of the human mind to solve complex problems!